The Girls with the Dragon Tattoos
Last summer, I immersed myself in Stieg Larsson’s Millenium universe and
loved every minute of it. I wish I could read these books again with that fresh
sense of discovery, but alas, this is not possible. Instead, I've been watching
the movies and although I know the storyline, there is still a feeling of
surprise when you see how they approach the story.
The American remake of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo has
been in theaters for a while now and I admit I often don't see the point of
remakes. What's wrong with the first version? Anyway!. Today is not about a
rant, it's about good movies. I've seen both versions now, the the Swedish original and the US
remake and as a break from posts about fatigue, disability politics and more
fatigue, I thought I'd contrast and compare. And for those of you who haven't
read the book(s)or watched the movies, I'll do my best to keep spoilers to a
minimum, but it's inevitable that there will be some. If you'd rather be
surprised, walk away now and I'll see you on the next post.
Lisbeth Salander. The heroine of the tale, Lisbeth is all
angles, both physically and emotionally. She is fierce, fearless and
frighteningly intelligent. She is also vulnerable and fragile. In the original,
Noomi Rapace created a Lisbeth that encumbers all of these traits and something
more. Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth was surprisingly effective given that she was
trying to create her own version of the character that already had a pretty
definitive interpretation by Rapace. Still, I felt that the American Lisbeth
didn't work quite as well. There was something slightly softened about her,
more of an emphasis on the vulnerability, almost as if the filmmakers didn't
trust the audience to rally behind someone prickly and hard to understand.
Also, and this is a minor quibble – Mara was the only actor in the US
movie who chose to use a Swedish accent. On one hand, I think it helped set her
character apart from the rest, making her seem more strange, on the other hand… This thing drives me crazy.
It happens so often in movies where American actors play characters from other
countries. When they speak in "their own language," they use an accent. It's
ridiculous - we know they're all supposed to be speaking Spanish/German/Swedish/French, so
take that leap and just speak English! (Especially because not many actors can
do a foreign accent convincingly and then it just becomes distracting)
Mikael Blomkvist. The hero of the story, Mikael is an
investigative journalist played by Michael Nyqvist and Daniel Craig
respectively. Mikael is an intellectual who is skilled in research and
investigation, but although he has served in the Army (Sweden
has the draft, all young men go through the Army), he is not comfortable with
violence and physicality. I remember reading a review/article somewhere about the movies
where the writer mentioned that Daniel Craig's version of the character is less
of a "male bimbo." I looked it up and bimbo seems to mean vacuous, stupid, with
somewhat loose morals and none of that applies. Both the Swedish and American
movie don't shrink away from the character’s active sex life, so that can't be
it. Mikael is certainly anything but stupid, so I don't see how that applies,
either. In his review of the US movie, Roger Ebert mentions that Nyqvist’s take on the
characters seems "less confident, more threatened" and that Daniel Craig
"brings along the confidence of James Bond." I do think that Craig
does a good job in terms of toning down his usual comfort with danger and
violence, but not quite as effectively as Nyqvist. The Swede is more effective
at making us see that Mikael is a man who lives in his head and, as most
writers, is not naturally comfortable when things get physical.
The Tattoo. Hands down, the Swedish version wins. I tried to
find pictures of both, but could only find Mara’s version. Not nearly as badass
as Rapace’s.
The Bad Guys. There are numerous bad guys in this series,
but the two primary villains in the first book/movie are Lisbeth’s trustee and
the killer. The trustee is wonderfully creepy in both movies, but less obviously
a slimeball in the Swedish one. One of things I loved about this series is the
way it depicts evil (if you will) within ordinary people. The surprise of
terrible acts being couched in banality is more of a shock to the system and
makes the story more effective and, I think, better reflects reality. The
Swedish movie, with the classic Scandinavian understatements and low-key
society shake you up more than the American version. In terms of the killer,
it's a bit of a toss-up. Stellan Skarsgaard, who I love, dons this character in
the US movie
and does such a brilliantly creepy and evil job that instinctively, I want to
give him the prize. Still, when you remember that most such killers tend to be
described as "such a nice, quiet man," the Swedish movie did it
better.
The Revenge Scene. I'm not going to get into details, but
there is a horrific scene in which Lisbeth is the victim of a sexual assault
that is crucial to the story. Equally crucial is her revenge and I wouldn't be
surprised if every showing, the women in the audience cheered. Again, although
both the US and
Swedish versions of these two scenes are very effective, cringe-inducing and
visceral, the Swedish wins. It made me cry. It hit me at a much deeper
emotional level, triggering a number of very complex emotions - sadness, fear,
rage, protectiveness.
The movies overall. After watching all three Swedish movies
in the series, I remember telling someone how good they were at showing people
thinking. This is really hard to do visually and most movies therefore focus on
the action. However, the defining characteristics of our two main characters is
crackling intelligence and, in the case of Lisbeth, genius. It is such an
important part of the story that their minds almost become characters, as well.
In the US
version, you get the sense of how smart these people are, too, but more through
their actions and research skills. I probably wouldn't have known to have this
quibble if I hadn't seen the original, because it was such a unique experience
to see that in the movie.
Giving my ratings in each category above, it's probably not
surprising that I think the Swedish original comes out ahead. It could be
simply because of the Swedish - as I mentioned in my review of the book,
"it's so %*&ing Scandinavian.” There is a cultural difference between Sweden
and the US and
although the American movie does a very, very good job at trying to be Swedish,
at the end of the day, it's a costume, not regular clothes. Would I notice if I
wasn't born and raised in a Scandinavian country myself? Probably not. Still, I
recommend that you watch both movies and do your own comparison. And then come
back and tell me what you think!
At the end of the day, that's my bottom line. That I want to
talk about the story, the books, the movies - they are all compelling and worth
spending time on. It's not often you come across something that makes you think
so much and have quite so many opinions and it is a wonderful ride.
Comments